DOCSLIB.ORG

The Common Law Powers of the New York State Attorney General [Forthcoming]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Common Law Powers of the New York State Attorney General [Forthcoming] LIEBMAN – THE COMMON LAW POWERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL [FORTHCOMING] THE COMMON LAW POWERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL Bennett Liebman* INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 2 I. HISTORY OF THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ................................................................. 3 A. The Advent of Affirmative Lawsuits ................................. 3 B. Constitutional History of the Office of Attorney General ............................................................................... 6 C. Statutory History of the Office of Attorney General ....... 12 II. COMMON LAW POWERS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ........... 23 A. Historic Common Law Powers of the Attorney General ............................................................................. 23 B. The Tweed RinG and the Attorney General ..................... 29 C. Common Law Prosecutorial Powers of the Attorney General ............................................................................. 32 D. Non-Criminal Common Law Powers .............................. 42 III. COMMON LAW POWERS IN OTHER STATES ............................. 48 IV. WHAT IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IN NEW YORK ASSERTED ALL POSSIBLE COMMON LAW POWERS? ............... 51 A. Representation of the State Interest ................................. 52 1. RepresentinG the People Rather Than the Executive Client in LitiGation .................................... 52 2. ChallenGinG the Constitutionality of LeGislative Action and RefusinG to Defend LeGislative Action ... 54 3. ChallenGinG the Governor .......................................... 55 B. Representation of the Public Interest ............................... 56 C. Intra-Branch Check .......................................................... 59 * Bennett Liebman is a Government Lawyer in Residence at Albany Law School. At Albany Law School, he has served variously as the Executive Director, the Acting Director and the Interim Director of the Government Law Center. In New York State government, he has served as counsel to Lieutenant Governor Mario Cuomo, special deputy counsel to Governor Mario Cuomo, a member of the State Racing and Wagering Board and deputy secretary for racing and gaming for Governor Andrew Cuomo. He is a summa cum laude graduate of Union College and a cum laude graduate of NYU Law School. 1 LIEBMAN – THE COMMON LAW POWERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL [FORTHCOMING] 2 LEGISLATION AND PUBLIC POLICY [Vol. 23:1] 1. NaminG the Special Prosecutor under Executive Law §63.8 ................................................................... 60 2. IgnorinG Governor’s Superseder or Request for an Investigation ............................................................... 60 3. IssuinG Advisory Opinions ......................................... 61 4. ControllinG the State’s LeGal Business ...................... 62 5. AllocatinG Settlement Funds from Remedial Actions ....................................................................... 63 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 64 INTRODUCTION The modern Attorney General in New York State does not simply spend his or her time representinG the State and its aGencies from suits. Instead, over the course of the last half century, the attorney General’s office has shifted from a largely defensive posture to one of affirmatively asserting the rights of the people of New York State.1 As former Attorney General Robert Abrams said in 1996 “Historically, the Attorney General’s office played a defensive role -- defending the state whenever the state was sued … In the modern era … it beGan to take the offensive lead on behalf of the public interest by brinGinG lawsuits.”2 “What once was largely a defensive office tasked with servinG as the state’s lawyer, is now known for an aGGressive portfolio crafted by the personality and politics of the state’s top leGal officer.”3 Yet in this brave new world of affirmative lawsuits, one potential weapon in the Attorney General’s arsenal has largely been underutilized. The office likely possesses significant common law 1 See, e.g., the many multi-state affirmative actions undertaken by the New York State Attorney General in Paul Brian Nolette, Advancing National Policy in the Courts: The Use of Multistate Litigation by State Attorneys General (Aug. 2011) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Boston College) (on file with Boston College University Libraries). 2 Nick Ravo, Louis Lefkowitz, 22-Year Attorney General, Dies at 91, N.Y. TIMES (June 22, 1996), https://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/22/nyregion/louis-lefkowitz-22-year- attorney-general-dies-at-91.html. “He filed environmental lawsuits against dumping and other activities. He demanded that funeral homes provide itemized bills, sued manufacturers of dangerous toys and forced merchants to identify secondhand appliances being sold as new.” Opinion, Farewell to ‘the General,’ N.Y. TIMES (June 25, 1996), https://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/25/opinion/farewell-to-the-general.html. Attorney General Abrams once noted that Lefkowitz “became one of the most revered and productive men to serve in the office.” Robert Abrams, The Role of Attorneys General in New York State’s Constitutional History, 61 N.Y. ST. B.J. 26, 29 (1989); see also Philip Weinberg, Office of N.Y. Attorney General Sets Pace for Others Nationwide, 76 N.Y. ST. B.A. J. 10 (2004). 3 David Lombardo, Office Changes with the Times, TIMES UNION, Sept. 3, 2018, at A3, NEWSBANK, No. 16E340D297123060. LIEBMAN – THE COMMON LAW POWERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL [FORTHCOMING] 2021 N.Y.S. AG COMMON LAW POWERS 3 powers, and these common law powers could be used to bolster the existing statutory powers of the Attorney General. This Article explores the constitutional development of the office of the Attorney General in New York State and the statutory history of the office. It reviews the many historical issues presented by the use of common law powers by the Attorney General in New York and compares that history with the use of common law powers by attorneys general in other states. It concludes with a perspective on how the common law powers of the Attorney General might be used to influence the actions of the New York Attorney General in the future. By doing so, this Article seeks to answer the question: Does the office of the New York Attorney General possess common law powers, and if the office does possess such powers, how might these powers be utilized by an activist Attorney General? I. HISTORY OF THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL A. The Advent of Affirmative Lawsuits BeGinninG six decades aGo when Attorney General Louis Lefkowitz4 deemed himself the people’s lawyer, successive New York Attorneys General have taken up the activist mantle. Modern Attorneys General frequently expand the scope of the office’s purview in order to pursue new directions in litigation that suit the Attorney General’s interests. Over time, activist attorneys General have taken on consumer protection suits, Wall Street greed, state government corruption, and even investigations implicating a sitting United States President. Attorney General Abrams did siGnificant, pioneering work in many multi-state affirmative action cases, especially cases taken aGainst 4 The attorney general’s office in New York is an elective office. When there is a vacancy in the office, the vacancy is filled by the legislature – when the legislature is in session, pursuant to Section 41 of the New York Public Officers Law. Attorney General Lefkowitz was appointed by the legislature in 1957. and subsequently won election for the office in 1958, 1962, 1966, 1970 and 1974. Barbara Underwood was similarly appointed by the legislature in May of 2018 and served until the conclusion of the 2018 calendar year. An early mention of Attorney General Lefkowitz as the people’s lawyer is contained in “Lefkowitz Warmly Hailed In Tour of Garment Center” New York Herald Tribune, August 29, 1961. LIEBMAN – THE COMMON LAW POWERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL [FORTHCOMING] 4 LEGISLATION AND PUBLIC POLICY [Vol. 23:1] federal Government aGencies, and also brought numerous enforcement actions on pollution, consumer abuse, and price-fixinG claims.5 Attorney General Dennis Vacco sued the board of Adelphi University to reduce the pay of the University’s president, Peter Diamandopoulos.6 He also focused considerable effort on increasinG the law enforcement efforts of the Attorney General,7 and his office helped finalize the Tobacco Master Settlement AGreement of 1998.8 Elliot Spitzer considered himself the sheriff of Wall Street.9 He was “the first to use the Martin Act to turn the attorney general’s office into ‘the country’s second securities reGulator.’”10 “He began with Merrill Lynch, then Salomon Smith Barney, and, eventually, he secured a $1.4 billion settlement with ten other investment-banking firms.”11 Spitzer also brought suits against Marsh, the giant insurance company,12 and brought controversial litiGation trying to force New York Stock 5 Nolette, supra note 1. See also Henry Gilgoff, Active Attorney General Views Vary on Abrams’ Record in Office, NEWSDAY, Oct. 23, 1992, 6. “By the mid-1980s, in fact, New York had developed a full-fledged environmental criminal enforcement apparatus, including a healthy competition between the state’s attorney general and local district attorneys.” James J. Periconi, The State of Environmental
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Honorable Eliot Spitzer State Capitol Albany, NY 12224 Antonia
    The Honorable Eliot Spitzer State Capitol Albany, NY 12224 Antonia C. Novello, M.D., M.P.H., Dr. P.H. New York State Commissioner of Health New York State Department of Health Corning Tower Empire State Plaza Albany, NY 12237 Dear Governor-elect Spitzer and Commissioner Novello: We write on behalf of the memberships of four committees of the New York City Bar Association -- Corrections, Health Law, Mental Health Law, and Social Welfare Law -- to urge New York State to cease its current practice of terminating Medicaid eligibility for individuals incarcerated in state and local correctional facilities. We urge the State instead to suspend Medicaid eligibility. Suspension will allow incarcerated Medicaid beneficiaries to receive needed benefits promptly upon release, thereby promoting continuity of care. Under the present system, formerly eligible individuals must reapply for Medicaid upon their release from correctional facilities. This process typically results in a significant delay in these individuals’ ability to access needed care in their communities. Members of this population already are at high risk for physical and mental illnesses, including substance addiction. Additionally, many releasees have serious chronic conditions for which they received care while in prison. It is imperative that they receive swift access to adequate and affordable medical care upon release. Failure to receive such assistance can hinder their ability to become productive members of the community, and in fact, may threaten the safety and well-being of the communities to which formerly incarcerated individuals return. Moreover, while awaiting the reinstatement of Medicaid coverage, formerly incarcerated individuals frequently turn to emergency rooms and other costly forms of care for assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the NORTHERN DISTRICT of NEW YORK KENNETH TYSON, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 9:17-CV-0
    Case 9:17-cv-00874-DNH-DEP Document 32 Filed 08/06/18 Page 1 of 47 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK KENNETH TYSON, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 9:17-CV-0874 (DNH/DEP) v. JOSEPH VASILE and TODD COMPO, Defendants. APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: FOR PLAINTIFF: KENNETH TYSON, Pro Se 15-A-2954 Elmira Correctional Facility P.O. Box 500 Elmira, NY 14902 FOR DEFENDANTS: HON. BARBARA UNDERWOOD TIMOTHY MULVEY, ESQ. New York State Attorney General Assistant Attorney General The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 DAVID E. PEEBLES CHIEF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case 9:17-cv-00874-DNH-DEP Document 32 Filed 08/06/18 Page 2 of 47 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Pro se plaintiff Kenneth Tyson, a New York State prison inmate, has commenced this action against two corrections employees stationed at the prison facility in which plaintiff was confined at the relevant times pursuant 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging the deprivation of his civil rights. Specifically, plaintiff asserts a First Amendment retaliation cause of action against defendants based on his claim that defendant Compo planted a weapon in his cell and issued plaintiff a misbehavior report concerning the matter, and defendant Vasile presided over an ensuing disciplinary hearing and found plaintiff guilty as charged, all allegedly in retaliation for plaintiff having previously filed grievances against other corrections employees. Currently pending before the court is a summary judgment motion brought by defendants seeking the dismissal of plaintiff's remaining retaliation claims. In their motion defendants argue that no reasonable factfinder could conclude plaintiff's protected conduct bore a causal relationship to the alleged retaliatory acts, principally because defendants were not implicated in the grievances filed by plaintiff prior to defendants' alleged retaliatory acts.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    T a b l e C o n T e n T s I s s u e 9 s u mm e r 2 0 1 3 o f pg 4 pg 18 pg 26 pg 43 Featured articles Pg 4 abraham lincoln and Freedom of the Press A Reappraisal by Harold Holzer Pg 18 interbranch tangling Separating Our Constitutional Powers by Judith s. Kaye Pg 26 rutgers v. Waddington Alexander Hamilton and the Birth Pangs of Judicial Review by David a. Weinstein Pg 43 People v. sanger and the Birth of Family Planning clinics in america by Maria T. Vullo dePartments Pg 2 From the executive director Pg 58 the david a. Garfinkel essay contest Pg 59 a look Back...and Forward Pg 66 society Officers and trustees Pg 66 society membership Pg 70 Become a member Back inside cover Hon. theodore t. Jones, Jr. In Memoriam Judicial Notice l 1 From the executive director udicial Notice is moving forward! We have a newly expanded board of editors Dearwho volunteer Members their time to solicit and review submissions, work with authors, and develop topics of legal history to explore. The board of editors is composed J of Henry M. Greenberg, Editor-in-Chief, John D. Gordan, III, albert M. rosenblatt, and David a. Weinstein. We are also fortunate to have David l. Goodwin, Assistant Editor, who edits the articles and footnotes with great care and knowledge. our own Michael W. benowitz, my able assistant, coordinates the layout and, most importantly, searches far and wide to find interesting and often little-known images that greatly compliment and enhance the articles.
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC HEARINGS and MEETINGS Human Resources Administration
    2685 VOLUME CXLV NUMBER 95 WEDNESDAY, MAY 16, 2018 Price: $4.00 Environmental Protection . 2694. Engineering Design and Construction . .. 2694 THE CITY RECORD TABLE OF CONTENTS Water and Sewer Operations . 2694 Health and Mental Hygiene . 2694 BILL DE BLASIO Agency Chief Contracting Officer . .. 2695 Mayor PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MEETINGS Human Resources Administration . .. 2695 Borough President - Bronx . 2685 Office of Contracts . 2695 LISETTE CAMILO Borough President - Brooklyn . 2685 Investigation . 2695 Commissioner, Department of Citywide City Planning Commission . 2686 Agency Chief Contracting Officer . .. 2695 Community Boards . 2687 Administrative Services Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice . 2695 Comptroller . 2688 Contracts . 2695 Consumer Affairs . 2688 ELI BLACHMAN Parks and Recreation . 2695 Housing Authority . 2688 Editor, The City Record Revenue . 2696 Landmarks Preservation Commission . 2688 Police . 2696 Transportation . .. 2689 Published Monday through Friday except legal Contract Administration . 2696 holidays by the New York City Department of Sanitation . 2696 COURT NOTICES Citywide Administrative Services under Authority Agency Chief Contracting Officer . 2696 Supreme Court . 2691 of Section 1066 of the New York City Charter . Queens County . 2691 School Construction Authority . 2697 Richmond County . 2692 Contract Services . 2697 Subscription $500 a year, $4 .00 daily ($5 .00 by mail) . Periodicals Postage Paid at New York, N .Y . Court Notice Maps . 2703 CONTRACT AWARD HEARINGS POSTMASTER: Send address changes to PROPERTY DISPOSITION Youth and Community Development . .. 2697 THE CITY RECORD, 1 Centre Street, Citywide Administrative Services . 2692 AGENCY RULES 17th Floor, New York, N .Y . 10007-1602 Office of Citywide Procurement . 2693 Consumer Affairs . 2697 Editorial Office/Subscription Changes: Police . 2693 Housing Preservation and Development . 2699 The City Record, 1 Centre Street, 17th Floor, PROCUREMENT SPECIAL MATERIALS New York, N .Y .
    [Show full text]
  • New York Rule As to the Law Governing the Validity of Contracts Nathan Greene
    Cornell Law Review Volume 12 Article 2 Issue 3 April 1927 New York Rule as to the Law Governing the Validity of Contracts Nathan Greene Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Nathan Greene, New York Rule as to the Law Governing the Validity of Contracts , 12 Cornell L. Rev. 286 (1927) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol12/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The New York Rule as to the Law Governing the Validity of Contracts - NATHAN GREENm * "The object of our study, then, is prediction... " Mr. Justice Holmes.' It is an evil inherent in the process of generalizing that to attain conciseness of expression and verbal simplicity we obscure such particulars as would mar the picture. There is no rule or maxim in the law that lawyers state with more confidence and apply with more misgiving than the rule that the law that governs a contract is the lex loci contractus. A single example will make graphic the-reason for the perplexity. The great Chan- cellor of New York lent his authority to this proposition:. "The lex loci is to govern, unless the parties hadinview a different place, by the terms of the contract. Si partes alium in contrahendo locum respixerint.
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. in the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, tfiese will be noted. Also, if unautfiorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at tfie upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Bell & Howell Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 UMI THE FRENCH EXPERIENCE OF PANDEMIC INFLUENZA DURING THE GREAT WAR DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Joseph Allen Talbert, B A , M A ***** The Ohio State University 2000 Dissertation Committee: \ Approved by Professor John A M.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline of New York Attorney General Lawsuit Against Exxonmobil
    TIMELINE OF NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST EXXONMOBIL Nov. 4, 2015 Then-Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announces his subpoena of ExxonMobil to determine whether the company’s statements to investors regarding the risks climate change posed to its business were consistent with Mar. 29, 2016 the company’s own internal climate research. Schneiderman and several other state attorneys general hold a press conference announcing the formation of “AGs United for Clean Power,” an informal group designed to promote anti-oil and gas policies at the state and federal level. Apr. 13, 2016 Spearheaded by Schneiderman, the state AGs who participated in the AGs United for Clean Power press conference, signed a legal common interest agreement that broadly conceals communications between the states in Jun. 15, 2016 order to subvert public records laws. Thirteen state AGs call Schneiderman and Healey’s investigations into ExxonMobil “a grave mistake,” adding, “We are concerned that our colleagues’ investigation undermines the trust the people have invested in Attorneys General to investigate fraud.” Aug. 2016 August 2016: Schneiderman indicated to the New York Times that his investigation was shifting to focus “less on the distant past than on relatively recent statements by ExxonMobil related to climate change and what it means to the company’s future.” Sept. 20, 2016 The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) launches its own investigation into ExxonMobil to understand how the company values its assets in order to determine if ExxonMobil misled investors on the risks climate change poses to its business. Jun. 2, 2017 June 2, 2017: Schneiderman again shifted the focus of his investigation into ExxonMobil, shifting from his original claim that the company was publicly trying to downplay the risks of global warming to a position that the company misrepresented how it was incorporating future climate policies into its business decisions, arguing that it may have inflated the risks climate change posed to its operations.
    [Show full text]
  • De Witt Clinton and the Origin of the Spoils System in New York
    73] Cornell University Library JK 731.M2 ... De Witt Clinton and the origin of th 3 1924 002 312 662 SlrUDEES IN HISTORY, ECONOMIOS AND PUBLIC LAW EDITED BY THE FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY Volume XXVIII] [Number 1 De WITT CLINTON AUD THE ORIGIN OF THE SPOILS SYSTEM IN NEW YORK HOWARD LEE McBAIN, Ph.D., /Sometime Honorary Fellow in Constitutional Lam, Colwmhia Univeriity THE COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS THE MACMILLAN COMPANY, AGENTS London : P. S. King & Son 1907 THE LIBRARY OF THE NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY 1 DeWITT CLINTON AND THE ORIOIN OF THE SPOILS SYSTEM IN NEW YORK Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924002312662 STUDIES IN HISTORY, ECONOMICS AND PUBLIC LAW EDITED BY THE FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY Volume XXVIII] [Number 1 De WITT CLINTON AND THE ORIGIN OF THE SPOILS SYSTEM IN NEW YORK HOWARD LEE McBAIN, Ph.D., Sometime Honorary Fellow in Constitutional Law, Colvmhia University THE COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS THE MACMILLAN COMPANY, AGENTS London : P. S. King & Son 1907 Copyright, 1907, BY HOWARD LEE McBAIN 1 JK 1S) CONTENTS CHAPTER I EARLY PATRONAGE UNDER THE CONSTITUTION PAGE Introduction 11-15 Misrepresentations of DeWitt Clinton's policies 11-12 Sources for study of 12 Plan of present study of New York patronage 13-15 Relation of systems previous to 1801 13 Relation of national systems I3~i5 Washington's policy of patronage 15-25 His problems differ from those of his successors 16-17 His attitude toward anti-adoptionists 17-20 In general 17-18 In Rhode Island 18-20 His consideration of Revolutionary services 20-21 His general principles in making appointments 21-23 Later consideration of politics in cabinet appointments 23-24 His New York appointments—Theory of Hamiltonian influencejrefuted.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Forks, ND
    V ' , y > ' \ ^ « t VC v M* * ' t * ^ ^r *» ^ **&:jL.ff. o -«.% ,, , *? «. f,s* \5 ^ VI *4«E T £>« •» / W • • - -O0»r 4 m$ ^im* / "\f v /i- vrm% - m*i$m *• 4* V & f S-V&V * ;„;.ww 1 " " ' > * J *< J v & j.s / w* ' 'i ^ 'a?V'^M' '""" GRAND FORKS HERALD, SATURDAY, MARCH 2,1918. FAUJ& TH light she received into her body the where Mr. Hitchccclc has 4cce£tei! Willow City Red MUSI' entire 110 volts of electricity which pastorate. ' - v-. •' "'•v.tV-''fira: .the. wire*, carried. She,, received.' se­ FUCKER TALES Cross Entertainment vere burns on her hand and rendered Mandan—"WeuT^f *'»« enwi- l*f. unconscious. Ehr had been warned Bismarck—James Manahan, for­ be a-going to jameatofrn" said M • Nets Nice Sum Of Money of the defective condition of the flight mer dbngressman. at large from Min­ tin Elvik, deranged farmer, 20 ye by a chambermaid and had'promised nesota and high in league^, councils., old, when arraigned before the Mo ,. Willow City, March 2.—Qnp of the to fix the light-but had failed to do so has. been here for several \ days on ton county examining/ (ward todll greatest demonstrations of patriotism' with the result that Mrs. Reid nearly league and private business. ' .When There beir.g no question aboiit hjj which has ever occurred here was lost her life. "Jin" showed up in the Grand Pa­ being Insane his request was granUjil| . given Wednesday night in the form of E. R. Sinkler represented Mrs. Reid cific lobby during the war conference and he was taken to Jamestown tip first provides a lien on the crop itself, an entertainment ior the benefit of and Bradford & Nash, Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Ratification of the Constitution in New York
    Introduction to the Ratification of the Constitution in New York During the decade preceding the War for Independence, New York was divided into two large provincial factions—the Delanceys and the Livingstons. When independence neared, the Delanceys were in power and they remained loyal to the king. The opposition to British imperial policy consisted of three groups—the radical elements led by New York City mechanics who advocated independence from Great Britain, a very conservative group that wanted reconciliation, and another conservative group that wanted to delay independence but would not give up key colonial rights. Because conservatives controlled the third Provincial Congress, that body gave no instructions on the question of independence to New York’s delegates to the Second Continental Congress meeting in Philadelphia. Not being instructed, the New York delegation, standing alone, did not vote on independence on 2 July 1776. Earlier, in response to the Continental Congress’ resolution of 15 May 1776, the third Provincial Congress had called on the electors in the different counties to elect a fourth provincial congress which might draft a constitution creating a state government. The election took place and the new Provincial Congress on 9 July resolved unanimously to join the other colonies in declaring independence. The next day it renamed itself the Provincial Convention. On 1 August the Convention appointed a committee of thirteen to draft a state constitution and to report by 26 August. The committee did not report until 12 March 1777. After almost six weeks of debate, the Convention on 20 April voted “in the name and by the authority of the good people of this State” to adopt the constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • Former Enron Vice President Sherron Watkins on the Enron Collapse
    UC Irvine UC Irvine Previously Published Works Title Former Enron vice president Sherron Watkins on the Enron collapse Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9pb4r7nj Journal Academy of Management Executive, 17(4) ISSN 1079-5545 Author Pearce, JL Publication Date 2003 DOI 10.5465/ame.2003.11851888 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California ? Academy of Management Executive, 2003, Vol. 17, No. 4 Former Enron vice president Sherron Watkins on the Enron collapse Academy Address, August 3, 2003, by Sherron Watkins Introduction to the address by Academy President Jone L. Pearce It is my pleasure to introduce Sherron Watkins, the Academy of Management's 2003 Distinguished Executive Speaker. By now, her story as the former vice president of Enron Corporation who tried to bring what she called "an elaborate accounting hoax" to the attention of Enron's chief executive officer is well known. In August 2001, responding to his invitation to employees to put any concerns in a comment box, she did so. When he did not address her explosive charges at a subsequent company-wide meeting, she sought a face-to-face meeting with him. A month later the CEO announced to employees that "our financial liquidity has never been stronger," while exercising his own $1.5 billion in stock options, just ahead of the company's announcement of a $618 million quarterly loss. When United States Congressional investigators uncovered her letter buried in boxes of documents, they brought Ms. Watkins before the United States Senate in February 2002 to testify about her warnings.
    [Show full text]
  • Opening Brief of State Petitioners and Amici
    UNITED STAT~S COURT OF APPEALS ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULEEFOB DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS IFILED MAR 1 0 20,08 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCU~ AMERICAN FARM B~~~-~, ~., ) CLERK Petitioners, V. Docket No. 06-1410 (and consolidated cases) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. On Petitions for Review of Final Actions of the United States Environmental Protection Agency FINAL OPENING BRIEF OF STATE PETITIONERS and STATE AMICI Petitioners New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Rhode Island, and Vermont, the District of Columbia, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and Amici Arizona, Maryland, and Massachusetts ANDREW M. CUOMO KATHERINE KENNEDY Attorney General of New York Special Deputy Attorney General BARBARA UNDERWOOD MICHAEL J. MYERS Solicitor General Assistant Attorney General DENISE A. HARTMAN Environmental Protection Bureau Assistant Solicitor General The Capitol Albany, New York 12224 (518) 402-2594 (additional counsel for State Petitioners listed in signature pages) Dated: March 7, 2008 CERTIFICATE AS TO PARTIES, RULINGS, AND RELATED CASES Pursuant to Circuit Rule 28(a)(1), the undersigned counsel of record certify as follows: A. PARTIES AND AMICI Petitioners The following parties appear in these consolidated cases as petitioners: In case no. 06-1410, filed December 14, 2006, the American Farm Bureau Federation and National Pork Producers Council. In case no. 06-1411, filed December 15, 2006, American Lung Association, Environmental Defense, and National Parks Conservation Association ( "Environmental Petitioners"). In case no. 06-1413, filed December 18, 2006, the National Mining Association (NMA).
    [Show full text]